Latest / Politix / Welcome to Impound Town

Transcript

Welcome to Impound Town · Politix

• 0:00
  maybe Democrats were trying to have a normal appropriations
• 0:04
  negotiation with
• 0:05
  SPEAKER_01: Republicans so that they could get more money spent,
• 0:07
  SPEAKER_01: so that it had inflationary pressure on prices,
• 0:12
  SPEAKER_01: so that eggs got more expensive,
• 0:13
  SPEAKER_01: so that they could really stick it to Donald Trump on the eggs question.
• 0:16
  SPEAKER_01: And the impoundment order is Trump's answer.
• 0:21
  SPEAKER_01: His way of saying,
• 0:22
  SPEAKER_01: no,
• 0:22
  SPEAKER_01: no,
• 0:22
  SPEAKER_01: no,
• 0:22
  SPEAKER_01: I'm just gonna depress the economy by not spending this money,
• 0:26
  SPEAKER_01: bringing the price of eggs back down,
• 0:28
  SPEAKER_01: checkmate libs.
• 0:33
  Hey,
• 0:34
  everyone,
• 0:34
  you're listening to a free preview of the Politics Podcast.
• 0:37
  This week,
• 0:37
  we'll cover a blitz of lawless actions Donald Trump has taken
• 0:42
  since last episode.
• 0:43
  We'll talk about who's behind it and whether there's any
• 0:47
  coherent method to it.
• 0:49
  We're going to fold in the news that Republicans kind of just
• 0:52
  barely confirmed Fox
• 0:54
  SPEAKER_01: News weekend host Pete Hegseth to be Secretary of Defense,
• 0:59
  SPEAKER_01: and who benefits when huge government departments like the Pentagon are
• 1:03
  SPEAKER_01: with massive budgets,
• 1:04
  SPEAKER_01: have no internal watchdogs,
• 1:06
  SPEAKER_01: and Donald Trump steals the power of the purse from Congress.
• 1:11
  So if you want to hear all of that,
• 1:12
  you can upgrade your subscription to paid at politics.fm.
• 1:15
  SPEAKER_01: Hey, everyone.
• 1:21
  SPEAKER_01: Welcome to the Politics Podcast.
• 1:22
  SPEAKER_01: I'm Brian Boyler.
• 1:23
  SPEAKER_01: I'm Matthew Iglesias.
• 1:25
  SPEAKER_01: Okay,
• 1:25
  SPEAKER_01: so to take listeners behind the scenes for a second,
• 1:28
  SPEAKER_01: Matt and I had planned this episode to follow a pretty simple arc.
• 1:32
  Starting on Friday night,
• 1:34
  Donald Trump conducted a purge,
• 1:37
  an illegal purge of over a dozen...
• 1:41
  inspectors general from major departments and agencies in the government.
• 1:44
  So these are basically anti-corruption watchdogs,
• 1:48
  and Trump wants them gone.
• 1:50
  SPEAKER_01: Also on Friday night, 50 Senate Republicans and Vice President J.D.
• 1:54
  SPEAKER_01: Vance confirmed Pete Hegseth to run the Defense Department.
• 2:00
  SPEAKER_01: So with zero votes to spare,
• 2:03
  Matt and I kind of think it's safe to say that Elon Musk got
• 2:08
  Pete Hegseth confirmed,
• 2:09
  SPEAKER_01: right?
• 2:09
  He threatened Republicans who opposed Hegseth with primary
• 2:13
  challengers and all the
• 2:16
  SPEAKER_01: holdouts basically folded.
• 2:20
  SPEAKER_01: And so we were going to ask,
• 2:21
  SPEAKER_01: like,
• 2:22
  what does it mean for Elon Musk to own a defense secretary that
• 2:25
  may not have an
• 2:26
  SPEAKER_01: internal watchdog?
• 2:28
  SPEAKER_01: Then after all that,
• 2:30
  Trump's acting budget director issued an order on Monday
• 2:35
  freezing all federal loan
• 2:36
  SPEAKER_01: and grant spending so that it can be cleansed of,
• 2:39
  SPEAKER_01: and this is a quote,
• 2:40
  SPEAKER_01: Marxist equity,
• 2:42
  SPEAKER_01: transgenderism,
• 2:43
  SPEAKER_01: and Green New Deal social engineering policies.
• 2:46
  SPEAKER_01: So that order is supposed to take effect Tuesday night at 5 p.m.,
• 2:50
  SPEAKER_01: so before this episode goes live.
• 2:52
  SPEAKER_01: And if it does,
• 2:54
  then I think we're in for a really white knuckle situation
• 2:57
  because that's kind of a
• 2:59
  SPEAKER_01: constitutional crisis in and of itself.
• 3:01
  SPEAKER_01: But if we want to squeeze everything together into one story,
• 3:05
  I think it looks like Trump is trying to establish a regime
• 3:10
  where he gets to treat
• 3:11
  SPEAKER_01: what Congress orders him to spend money on as sort of advisory.
• 3:15
  Then the money comes in and then it disappears into these
• 3:18
  agencies and departments
• 3:19
  that are totally shielded from oversight because there's no
• 3:22
  inspectors general and
• 3:23
  SPEAKER_01: he wouldn't cooperate with Congress.
• 3:27
  SPEAKER_01: So that's neat.
• 3:28
  SPEAKER_01: Matt, what could possibly go wrong with that?
• 3:30
  SPEAKER_01: Or do you think that I'm just like over living it a little bit?
• 3:33
  SPEAKER_00: I mean...
• 3:34
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, look, it's hard to say.
• 3:38
  SPEAKER_00: One thing that is true is that the Empowerment Control Act,
• 3:42
  SPEAKER_00: which Trump is contesting the constitutionality of,
• 3:47
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 3:47
  SPEAKER_00: is a 1974 law.
• 3:50
  SPEAKER_00: Um,
• 3:50
  SPEAKER_00: so that's a long time ago,
• 3:52
  SPEAKER_00: 50 years,
• 3:53
  SPEAKER_00: um,
• 3:53
  SPEAKER_00: in the scheme of things,
• 3:54
  SPEAKER_00: the constitutional argument against it strikes me as very dubious.
• 3:58
  SPEAKER_00: Um, you know, we'll see what happens.
• 3:59
  It is also true that the Republic existed for 200 years,
• 4:03
  uh,
• 4:04
  before its passage.
• 4:05
  SPEAKER_00: And I think,
• 4:06
  SPEAKER_00: I mean,
• 4:06
  SPEAKER_00: a lot of what we're going to talk about is that,
• 4:09
  SPEAKER_00: um,
• 4:09
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 4:10
  SPEAKER_00: ultimately you have a
• 4:17
  SPEAKER_00: I don't know what's going to happen with that.
• 4:20
  SPEAKER_00: There's a repeated, iterated game here.
• 4:23
  I assume when we first were planning this out,
• 4:28
  we were talking about inspectors general.
• 4:30
  And I think there was a real question in both of our minds as
• 4:33
  to would Democrats
• 4:34
  SPEAKER_00: fight on that point in an appropriations battle?
• 4:37
  I think you basically have to fight an impoundment in an
• 4:40
  appropriations battle
• 4:42
  because the thing you could fight about other than inspector
• 4:46
  generals is just
• 4:47
  SPEAKER_00: spending levels.
• 4:48
  But if the issue is that Trump won't spend the money,
• 4:52
  then what is there to fight about?
• 4:57
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, I was talking to people, House Dems,
• 5:02
  little bit behind the curve and they were like complaining
• 5:05
  about the conditioning
• 5:06
  of uh aid to california on you know x y and z and you know
• 5:11
  that'll get worked out
• 5:12
  one way or the other these things happen but it's like what is
• 5:15
  the point of
• 5:16
  bargaining for disaster relief for california if trump is going
• 5:20
  to turn around and
• 5:22
  SPEAKER_00: not spend the money
• 5:24
  That's a different ballgame in terms of what the congressional
• 5:29
  negotiation is.
• 5:31
  SPEAKER_00: But can we back up?
• 5:32
  SPEAKER_00: Can you explain inspectors general and the significance of this?
• 5:38
  SPEAKER_00: The only IG that I was ever...
• 5:42
  really involved with is the the amtrak inspector general um who
• 5:46
  i believe did not
• 5:47
  get fired in this purge and is not really considered a major
• 5:51
  agency and you know
• 5:53
  they do some good stuff but it's a it's a little picayune
• 5:55
  related to train
• 5:56
  management like like what's what's the political context sure
• 6:00
  inspector generals
• 6:01
  and this kind of purge because trump has been president before
• 6:05
  um and has has dealt
• 6:06
  SPEAKER_00: with these issues
• 6:07
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 6:08
  SPEAKER_01: I mean,
• 6:08
  so in both the Inspector's General case and in the Impoundment
• 6:11
  Control Act case,
• 6:12
  SPEAKER_01: there's a statutory reason to believe that what Trump did is illegal.
• 6:18
  SPEAKER_01: In the impoundment case,
• 6:21
  I think the core thing is that the Impoundment Control Act was
• 6:24
  meant to...
• 6:27
  like give shape to what is in the constitution about who gets
• 6:30
  to say where the
• 6:31
  SPEAKER_01: money gets spent.
• 6:32
  SPEAKER_01: It's basically like to clarify.
• 6:33
  SPEAKER_01: And before that, the constitution governed and Nixon,
• 6:38
  SPEAKER_01: intruded on that too much.
• 6:39
  SPEAKER_01: That's why that law exists.
• 6:41
  SPEAKER_01: The inspector's general law,
• 6:43
  which requires the president to notify Congress 30 days before
• 6:48
  firing an inspector
• 6:49
  SPEAKER_01: general and to fire him with cause,
• 6:50
  SPEAKER_01: to enumerate the causes,
• 6:52
  I believe that law exists because Trump tried a smaller scale
• 6:55
  version of this in
• 6:56
  SPEAKER_01: his first term.
• 6:57
  An inspector general played a role in the emergence of the
• 7:03
  Ukraine scandal that got
• 7:04
  SPEAKER_01: Trump impeached.
• 7:06
  And that's because inspectors general inhabit agencies and
• 7:11
  departments and are
• 7:11
  sometimes like created specially to look into big government
• 7:16
  programs that exist on
• 7:17
  SPEAKER_01: a temporary basis.
• 7:18
  SPEAKER_01: Like the TARP program had its own inspector general.
• 7:21
  SPEAKER_01: The Afghanistan reconstruction effort had its own inspector general.
• 7:24
  And they basically exist to serve the federal government
• 7:28
  bureaucracy purposes that
• 7:30
  SPEAKER_01: internal affairs serves at a police department,
• 7:33
  SPEAKER_01: right?
• 7:33
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 7:35
  Most of the department does what it's essentially instructed
• 7:38
  under the law to do or
• 7:39
  SPEAKER_01: by the White House to do.
• 7:41
  And then if the inspector general notices or gets wind of
• 7:45
  anything irregular,
• 7:45
  SPEAKER_01: and usually this is referred to as waste,
• 7:48
  SPEAKER_01: fraud,
• 7:48
  SPEAKER_01: and abuse,
• 7:49
  SPEAKER_01: that they investigate,
• 7:50
  SPEAKER_01: they have essentially compulsory authority to
• 7:54
  to interview the people in the government or people who've left
• 7:57
  the government or
• 7:58
  SPEAKER_01: witnesses or whatever.
• 8:00
  SPEAKER_01: And then they can,
• 8:01
  SPEAKER_01: if they find criminal activity,
• 8:02
  SPEAKER_01: they can refer that to the justice department.
• 8:04
  SPEAKER_01: If they basically just find corruption or incompetence or whatever,
• 8:08
  SPEAKER_01: that will tend to end up in a report and in the hands of Congress.
• 8:14
  SPEAKER_01: And in my 20 year career,
• 8:18
  I've been aware of and on to several inspectors general,
• 8:22
  depending on what the issue was.
• 8:24
  SPEAKER_01: And some of them are like really competent and aggressive and,
• 8:28
  SPEAKER_01: and,
• 8:28
  SPEAKER_01: you know,
• 8:29
  SPEAKER_01: become a kind of thorn in the side of,
• 8:31
  SPEAKER_01: of whoever is in charge,
• 8:33
  SPEAKER_01: whoever the president is in their administration.
• 8:34
  SPEAKER_01: Sometimes they're lazy.
• 8:35
  SPEAKER_01: Sometimes they're kind of in the bag for one party or another.
• 8:38
  Um,
• 8:39
  but they have kind of routinely produced,
• 8:44
  uh,
• 8:44
  evidence of wrongdoing,
• 8:46
  um,
• 8:46
  that,
• 8:47
  uh,
• 8:48
  SPEAKER_01: has led to news happening, right?
• 8:51
  SPEAKER_01: Like with the Ukraine example.
• 8:53
  SPEAKER_01: And that's why Trump doesn't want them around.
• 8:58
  SPEAKER_01: I'm not certain what his end game in firing,
• 9:02
  SPEAKER_01: I think it's 17 of these people is,
• 9:06
  SPEAKER_01: whether he intends to leave those
• 9:09
  SPEAKER_01: A, whether he thinks he's going to get away with it, right?
• 9:11
  Because these people have a pretty solid legal claim that their
• 9:16
  firings were inappropriate.
• 9:17
  SPEAKER_01: But if Trump gets away with it,
• 9:18
  would he try to put cronies in as inspectors general or just
• 9:21
  leave the offices vacant?
• 9:25
  SPEAKER_01: And so now I think that we're kind of in a limbo on that question.
• 9:32
  And,
• 9:33
  you know,
• 9:33
  there's like,
• 9:34
  there are Republicans who care about inspectors general.
• 9:36
  SPEAKER_01: Chuck Grassley,
• 9:37
  SPEAKER_01: who's a very senior Senate Republican,
• 9:40
  SPEAKER_01: has been an ally of inspectors,
• 9:42
  SPEAKER_01: like a real advocate for them.
• 9:43
  And he issued a very mealy mouth statement that did essentially
• 9:49
  say these firings
• 9:51
  SPEAKER_01: did not comply with the law.
• 9:53
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, I think Grassley's view, right?
• 9:55
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, it's sort of traditional Republican, right?
• 9:58
  SPEAKER_00: view of this is that,
• 10:01
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 10:02
  SPEAKER_00: like the government,
• 10:03
  SPEAKER_00: the bureaucracy has a lot of realm for waste and corruption in it.
• 10:10
  SPEAKER_00: Yeah, he comes at it from a concern.
• 10:11
  SPEAKER_00: Like we shouldn't trust.
• 10:13
  SPEAKER_00: And, you know, all these people.
• 10:15
  And so you need a strong IG office in the spirit of like who
• 10:19
  watches The Watchmen,
• 10:21
  SPEAKER_00: et cetera,
• 10:21
  SPEAKER_00: et cetera,
• 10:22
  SPEAKER_00: et cetera.
• 10:24
  I also think – I mean I think how Trump will probably
• 10:28
  ultimately sell this is like
• 10:30
  SPEAKER_00: with any inspector general,
• 10:32
  SPEAKER_00: right?
• 10:33
  SPEAKER_00: I mean you can be lazier.
• 10:34
  SPEAKER_00: You can be harder working.
• 10:36
  SPEAKER_00: And you can also sort of like point the flashlight like up or down.
• 10:44
  SPEAKER_00: Right.
• 10:44
  SPEAKER_00: Like finding that a guy in the St.
• 10:47
  SPEAKER_00: Louis office of some agency has like stolen,
• 10:52
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 10:52
  SPEAKER_00: a stapler from the office,
• 10:55
  SPEAKER_00: like that's a legitimate inspector general function.
• 10:59
  And like also finding that the Senate confirmed undersecretary
• 11:03
  has like stolen $27
• 11:05
  million and given it to his cousin is a legitimate inspector
• 11:10
  general function.
• 11:12
  SPEAKER_00: And like, there's a, there's a balance, right.
• 11:14
  SPEAKER_00: Of like, who do you watch dog?
• 11:16
  SPEAKER_00: Like, what are you trying to do?
• 11:19
  SPEAKER_00: A lot of the stuff that Trump,
• 11:22
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 11:23
  SPEAKER_00: a lot of the spirit of the stuff that,
• 11:25
  SPEAKER_00: that Trump has been doing early seems to me to be to try to,
• 11:28
  SPEAKER_00: um,
• 11:29
  SPEAKER_00: you know, break the spirit of the civil service, right?
• 11:33
  SPEAKER_00: Like get people to quit, to...
• 11:37
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 11:38
  SPEAKER_00: self-purge,
• 11:40
  SPEAKER_00: assign people to jobs that they know they're not going to want to do,
• 11:43
  SPEAKER_00: right?
• 11:44
  That the more you can just sort of crush these institutions,
• 11:50
  the more you can do.
• 11:51
  SPEAKER_00: And so you could just,
• 11:53
  SPEAKER_00: like,
• 11:53
  SPEAKER_00: just ban the IG offices,
• 11:56
  SPEAKER_00: but you could also,
• 11:57
  SPEAKER_00: like,
• 11:58
  SPEAKER_00: use them to that end.
• 12:01
  SPEAKER_00: Yeah, I mean, so... Right, like, if you have your...
• 12:05
  SPEAKER_00: Your people, right?
• 12:07
  SPEAKER_00: Because you have an executive order that says,
• 12:09
  SPEAKER_00: well,
• 12:09
  SPEAKER_00: we're going to root out DEI throughout the federal government.
• 12:12
  But they're acutely aware that there's nothing magical about
• 12:18
  those initials,
• 12:20
  right?
• 12:20
  SPEAKER_00: And so you might need aggressive inspector generals to...
• 12:24
  SPEAKER_00: root out any hint of inclusion.
• 12:28
  SPEAKER_00: Somebody's got a pride flag on their desk.
• 12:30
  What you're pointing to is what I think Trump might have in
• 12:34
  mind if he intended to
• 12:35
  SPEAKER_01: replace the IGs he fired.
• 12:38
  That he could put cronies in there who would understand that
• 12:44
  he's allowed to steal
• 12:45
  SPEAKER_01: all the money,
• 12:46
  SPEAKER_01: but that
• 12:47
  the IG should spend their time browbeating civil servants and
• 12:52
  nitpicking them if
• 12:53
  they show any indication of anything other than total loyalty
• 12:56
  to the president.
• 12:58
  SPEAKER_01: Getting rid of them,
• 13:00
  irrespective of whether they're replaced or tying up their jobs
• 13:04
  in legal process
• 13:06
  SPEAKER_01: for an indefinite period of time,
• 13:08
  SPEAKER_01: I think doesn't really accomplish the browbeating exercise.
• 13:13
  SPEAKER_01: If anything, I think it actually promotes more leaking, right?
• 13:16
  Because if you're a civil servant who's trying to do your job
• 13:22
  and then you get a...
• 13:25
  SPEAKER_01: You get a memorandum that says,
• 13:27
  SPEAKER_01: hey,
• 13:27
  SPEAKER_01: we're going to illegally stop spending money that Congress appropriated.
• 13:32
  there's no IG maybe to like do an investigation of how this
• 13:37
  came about and what the
• 13:38
  SPEAKER_01: consequences are or whatever.
• 13:39
  SPEAKER_01: And so you just leak to the press or you go straight to Congress.
• 13:42
  And I think that you can kind of see that like step one is
• 13:46
  actually just getting
• 13:47
  rid of the anti-corruption watchdog in like the question of who
• 13:53
  Trump didn't fire,
• 13:54
  SPEAKER_01: right?
• 13:54
  SPEAKER_01: Like you mentioned the Amtrak IGs gets to keep his job.
• 13:58
  SPEAKER_01: And that's,
• 13:59
  SPEAKER_01: probably just because there's not that much money there.
• 14:02
  SPEAKER_01: There's not much... It's not the focal point of Trump's corrupt ends.
• 14:10
  But he also let an inspector general named Michael Horowitz at
• 14:16
  Justice Department keep his job.
• 14:18
  And that's interesting because the Justice Department's IG is
• 14:22
  capable of producing
• 14:23
  SPEAKER_01: really politically damaging reports.
• 14:26
  SPEAKER_01: And Horowitz is...
• 14:28
  SPEAKER_01: very capable of doing like a thorough inspector general investigation.
• 14:33
  SPEAKER_01: But he has shown over many,
• 14:35
  many years now that he does not want to get crosswise with
• 14:40
  Trump and when he can be
• 14:41
  SPEAKER_01: helpful to Trump,
• 14:43
  SPEAKER_01: like by doing these sort of picayune side investigations,
• 14:47
  like did Jim Comey act appropriately when he invested Russian interference?
• 14:52
  SPEAKER_01: And like, you know, he's the guy who,
• 14:59
  I think like unearthed the Peter struck and Lisa page text
• 15:03
  messages and the,
• 15:05
  SPEAKER_01: um,
• 15:05
  SPEAKER_01: and like,
• 15:06
  SPEAKER_01: yeah,
• 15:06
  SPEAKER_01: found the guy who did,
• 15:07
  SPEAKER_01: did like a FISA application wrong that led to a prosecution.
• 15:12
  SPEAKER_01: And,
• 15:12
  SPEAKER_01: and then MAGA was able to like spin all this up into like,
• 15:15
  SPEAKER_01: look,
• 15:15
  SPEAKER_01: the deep state is aligning against Trump.
• 15:17
  SPEAKER_01: And so I think both like as a, as a, uh,
• 15:24
  SPEAKER_01: thanks to Michael Horowitz,
• 15:25
  but also maybe in recognition of the fact that Horowitz knows
• 15:29
  where all the bodies
• 15:30
  SPEAKER_01: are buried,
• 15:31
  SPEAKER_01: he gets to stay.
• 15:33
  It's the people that Trump doesn't trust to look the other way
• 15:38
  that got fired.
• 15:41
  SPEAKER_01: And so maybe down the line,
• 15:43
  we end up with a new problem where the new inspectors general
• 15:47
  could amp up the
• 15:49
  SPEAKER_01: terrorization of the civil service.
• 15:51
  But I think that that's happening very acutely without any
• 15:58
  inspector general input.
• 16:01
  SPEAKER_01: And it's not going to...
• 16:05
  SPEAKER_01: It's not going to...
• 16:06
  SPEAKER_01: I mean,
• 16:07
  SPEAKER_01: I'm guessing lots of people will leave their jobs,
• 16:09
  SPEAKER_01: but I think other people will stick around.
• 16:11
  SPEAKER_01: And since they don't have an inspector general to lean on,
• 16:14
  SPEAKER_01: they'll just leak more information about what's happening.
• 16:17
  And then probably just get fired or whatever for leaking
• 16:22
  against the president.
• 16:24
  SPEAKER_01: So that's what I think the IG purge is about.
• 16:29
  SPEAKER_01: I think it's...
• 16:31
  SPEAKER_01: I think in and of itself,
• 16:33
  SPEAKER_01: it's worth Democrats being like,
• 16:36
  SPEAKER_01: no,
• 16:37
  like we're not going to fund apartments that are primed to
• 16:43
  corruption and that have
• 16:44
  SPEAKER_01: no internal watchdogs.
• 16:46
  And so reinstall them if you want the government to be funded
• 16:51
  in a timely way,
• 16:53
  SPEAKER_01: which is like coming up in a few weeks.
• 16:55
  SPEAKER_01: Right.
• 16:56
  SPEAKER_01: But then as you say, like the,
• 17:01
  SPEAKER_01: The rubber really meets the road if Trump's also saying no.
• 17:05
  SPEAKER_01: Not only do you guys not get eyes on the money,
• 17:08
  but I get to just say whether the things that you appropriate
• 17:11
  money for actually
• 17:12
  SPEAKER_01: get funded.
• 17:14
  So I do think that we're like,
• 17:15
  there's going to be litigation about maybe about the IG firings.
• 17:19
  SPEAKER_01: There's definitely going to be litigation about
• 17:21
  SPEAKER_01: if the impoundment order goes into effect.
• 17:26
  SPEAKER_01: And either way,
• 17:27
  SPEAKER_01: I think we're set for like,
• 17:30
  either Democrats are going to align against funding the
• 17:32
  government under these kind
• 17:34
  SPEAKER_01: of lawless circumstances,
• 17:35
  or like Democrats are going to go into that fight split and
• 17:38
  it's going to create a
• 17:40
  SPEAKER_01: big row on the left.
• 17:43
  SPEAKER_00: Yeah, I mean, I just, I don't really know what's going to happen.
• 17:46
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, if it was limited to the inspectors general, right?
• 17:50
  i think what would happen is that the the smart boys of the
• 17:54
  internet would do takes
• 17:56
  about how you know democrats can't vote for appropriation bills
• 18:00
  um unless they get
• 18:02
  this inspector general problem fixed and then in practice like
• 18:06
  dem appropriators
• 18:07
  SPEAKER_00: would go into meetings and would be like uh
• 18:10
  SPEAKER_00: you know, give me like 17 extra dollars for the what's its.
• 18:15
  SPEAKER_00: And they would go just like, you see time and again, right?
• 18:18
  SPEAKER_00: Like Democrats in appropriations,
• 18:20
  SPEAKER_00: negotiations,
• 18:22
  SPEAKER_00: prioritize getting money spent for programs that they believe in.
• 18:27
  SPEAKER_00: Whether you agree with that or not, that is what they do.
• 18:30
  SPEAKER_01: That's a good description.
• 18:31
  There was one time during Trump's first term when Democrats
• 18:35
  tried to bargain for an
• 18:37
  SPEAKER_00: unrelated policy measure.
• 18:41
  But the reason why across disaster relief disputes with all
• 18:46
  different partisan
• 18:47
  SPEAKER_00: configurations in other negotiations with Trump,
• 18:50
  SPEAKER_00: in other negotiations with Bush,
• 18:52
  SPEAKER_00: it's like –
• 18:53
  SPEAKER_00: On some like lizard brain level,
• 18:55
  like Democrats like truly are the party that likes higher
• 18:58
  levels of government spending.
• 19:00
  SPEAKER_00: And particularly when they're not doing a party line vote,
• 19:05
  like if they can get some kind of bipartisan deal that raises
• 19:08
  spending on something
• 19:09
  SPEAKER_00: that they care about,
• 19:10
  SPEAKER_00: like they're always willing to do it,
• 19:12
  SPEAKER_00: right?
• 19:13
  SPEAKER_00: So it's like, if Republicans want
• 19:16
  SPEAKER_00: disaster relief for a hurricane that happened in a red state.
• 19:20
  SPEAKER_00: Democrats are happy to say yes to that.
• 19:22
  SPEAKER_00: And it's never like you need to legalize abortion, right?
• 19:26
  SPEAKER_00: It's always just like,
• 19:27
  SPEAKER_00: give me $16 for this other thing,
• 19:30
  SPEAKER_00: like lower scale disaster,
• 19:31
  SPEAKER_00: whatever it is.
• 19:33
  The impoundment actually brings the whole logic of bipartisan
• 19:40
  negotiation and
• 19:40
  SPEAKER_00: divided government into question.
• 19:43
  Because the upshot of this is that Republican Party presidents
• 19:51
  or Republican Party
• 19:52
  SPEAKER_00: Senate minorities,
• 19:53
  SPEAKER_00: depending on what's happening,
• 19:55
  are constantly agreeing to spend money on things that they
• 19:58
  don't think money should
• 19:59
  SPEAKER_00: be spent on.
• 20:01
  SPEAKER_00: Right.
• 20:01
  SPEAKER_00: Like that,
• 20:02
  SPEAKER_00: that's,
• 20:02
  SPEAKER_00: that's the upshot of this,
• 20:04
  SPEAKER_00: this logic of structure is that Democrats have said,
• 20:09
  SPEAKER_00: we will give you X,
• 20:10
  SPEAKER_00: we will give you Y,
• 20:11
  SPEAKER_00: we will go along with Z,
• 20:12
  SPEAKER_00: like whatever it is,
• 20:14
  because we want money to be spent on this thing that like you
• 20:19
  on the merits,
• 20:20
  SPEAKER_00: like don't want to spend money on.
• 20:23
  SPEAKER_00: Um,
• 20:24
  and the fact that the executive branch has to spend the money
• 20:28
  that has been agreed
• 20:29
  SPEAKER_00: to is what makes it possible to do those kinds of agreements,
• 20:34
  SPEAKER_00: right?
• 20:35
  SPEAKER_00: Like it's,
• 20:36
  SPEAKER_00: it's the same as any like business transaction,
• 20:38
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 20:38
  SPEAKER_00: it's like people make deals and if you can't stick to the deal,
• 20:43
  SPEAKER_00: um,
• 20:45
  SPEAKER_00: Whether or not you had some legal pretext to welch on the deal,
• 20:51
  SPEAKER_00: people aren't going to want to do deals with you again.
• 20:55
  Trump,
• 20:56
  infamously,
• 20:57
  in his private sector career,
• 20:59
  has really explored that logic.
• 21:02
  I think conventional wisdom is that if you were a casino and
• 21:08
  hotel developer,
• 21:09
  SPEAKER_00: who became well known for stiffing contractors on things that like,
• 21:15
  whether or not it was possible for the contractors you stiffed
• 21:19
  to legally enforce
• 21:20
  SPEAKER_00: their right to full payment,
• 21:21
  SPEAKER_00: that like people would want to stop working for you.
• 21:24
  SPEAKER_00: And Trump has been incredibly successful over the years at,
• 21:29
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 21:30
  SPEAKER_00: like,
• 21:30
  SPEAKER_00: like moving on,
• 21:31
  SPEAKER_00: like keeping this going,
• 21:33
  SPEAKER_00: even though on the one level,
• 21:35
  SPEAKER_00: it's like,
• 21:35
  SPEAKER_00: everybody knows that in Atlantic city,
• 21:38
  SPEAKER_00: Trump,
• 21:39
  Welched on all kinds of valid commitments to all kinds of
• 21:43
  subcontractors and lost
• 21:47
  SPEAKER_00: all this money for his shareholders.
• 21:49
  And you would think that would have been the end for somebody's
• 21:52
  business career,
• 21:53
  SPEAKER_00: that nobody would want to do business with him again.
• 21:55
  SPEAKER_00: But he...
• 21:57
  SPEAKER_00: And he indeed stopped building casinos after that, but he kept going.
• 22:03
  SPEAKER_00: He made a lot of money off of those scams.
• 22:06
  SPEAKER_00: He parlayed his comeback into writing a book,
• 22:09
  SPEAKER_00: The Art of the Comeback,
• 22:10
  SPEAKER_00: which he explains fairly candidly that he ripped all these people off.
• 22:17
  SPEAKER_00: which he then like leveraged into a television show.
• 22:19
  SPEAKER_00: Okay.
• 22:20
  SPEAKER_01: But I mean, the analogy breaks down a little bit, right?
• 22:22
  SPEAKER_01: Because,
• 22:23
  SPEAKER_01: you know,
• 22:24
  SPEAKER_01: you can go from contractor to contractor,
• 22:25
  SPEAKER_01: but there's one Congress and yes,
• 22:27
  SPEAKER_01: the membership changes,
• 22:29
  SPEAKER_01: but like everyone in Congress is aware of the score.
• 22:32
  SPEAKER_01: And separately, like Trump, he has nowhere left to parlay to.
• 22:35
  SPEAKER_01: He just won the biggest prize there is, right?
• 22:38
  SPEAKER_01: So he's out of room to like, okay, onto the next scam.
• 22:43
  SPEAKER_01: Like this has to be resolved.
• 22:44
  SPEAKER_00: I'm just,
• 22:45
  SPEAKER_00: I'm just like,
• 22:46
  SPEAKER_00: I'm trying to explain like temperamentally,
• 22:51
  SPEAKER_00: I think like why,
• 22:53
  I can see why Trump's life experience makes him the person who
• 22:58
  has wanted to like
• 22:59
  SPEAKER_00: press go on this Russell Vogt impoundment concept.
• 23:04
  SPEAKER_00: But I don't, I have big doubts, right?
• 23:08
  SPEAKER_00: Like it seems like this is going to lead to Democrats not wanting to do
• 23:14
  any kind of appropriation deal with republicans um now if
• 23:19
  republicans can get their
• 23:20
  shit together pass an appropriation bill through the house have
• 23:24
  majority support
• 23:26
  for it in the senate but not get to the 60 votes you know i
• 23:31
  think it's it's like a
• 23:32
  little tough for democrats to orchestrate a government shutdown
• 23:35
  yeah over anything
• 23:38
  SPEAKER_00: but like
• 23:39
  Republicans haven't been able to pass a party-line
• 23:42
  appropriations bill out of the
• 23:43
  SPEAKER_00: House in many,
• 23:44
  SPEAKER_00: many years.
• 23:44
  SPEAKER_00: 20 years or something like that.
• 23:46
  SPEAKER_00: And with larger House majorities.
• 23:48
  Well,
• 23:48
  and we're going to get to Pete Hegseth,
• 23:50
  but he lost three votes,
• 23:52
  right?
• 23:53
  And there's going to be a lot more for people to disagree with
• 23:57
  about in any kind of
• 23:58
  SPEAKER_01: appropriations bill that comes out of the House,
• 24:01
  SPEAKER_01: I would suspect.
• 24:02
  SPEAKER_01: I mean,
• 24:03
  SPEAKER_01: so when I wrote about the Inspector General,
• 24:06
  SPEAKER_01: my take on it was like Democrats can just be like,
• 24:08
  SPEAKER_01: look,
• 24:10
  SPEAKER_01: We're not going to filibuster appropriations.
• 24:12
  SPEAKER_01: We're not going to filibuster the debt limit.
• 24:13
  SPEAKER_01: But when it turns out you need our votes,
• 24:15
  SPEAKER_01: they're not going to be there unless you get right with the law.
• 24:18
  And I think that they can basically take the same approach with
• 24:22
  the impoundment
• 24:25
  SPEAKER_01: power grab layered on top of it.
• 24:27
  SPEAKER_01: But they might have to consider doing the more aggressive thing,
• 24:31
  SPEAKER_01: which is actually filibustering those things unless –
• 24:34
  SPEAKER_01: Unless Republicans get right.
• 24:35
  SPEAKER_01: Now,
• 24:37
  SPEAKER_01: I suspect that possibly even by the time people listen to this episode,
• 24:42
  SPEAKER_01: there will be an injunction against this order.
• 24:47
  So there will be limited interruption to the flow of grant and
• 24:51
  loan money coming
• 24:52
  SPEAKER_01: out of the federal government.
• 24:54
  SPEAKER_01: And if Trump honors the injunction,
• 24:57
  SPEAKER_01: things will appear to be fairly normal and it'll take the pressure off.
• 25:01
  SPEAKER_01: both Democrats and Republicans in Congress to, to push back on this.
• 25:06
  And that either way,
• 25:07
  like this is going to make it to the Supreme court very quickly.
• 25:11
  SPEAKER_01: And we're going to have like a real test case, right?
• 25:13
  SPEAKER_01: Like is,
• 25:14
  SPEAKER_01: is Trump going to get his sign off for,
• 25:18
  SPEAKER_01: for like establishing this base,
• 25:22
  SPEAKER_00: the dictatorial power over,
• 25:23
  SPEAKER_00: over the,
• 25:23
  SPEAKER_00: well,
• 25:24
  SPEAKER_00: so the,
• 25:25
  SPEAKER_00: the memo that OMB put out,
• 25:27
  SPEAKER_00: as I understand it,
• 25:28
  SPEAKER_00: like,
• 25:28
  SPEAKER_00: so,
• 25:28
  SPEAKER_00: so project 2025,
• 25:31
  SPEAKER_00: and some of Trump's verbal diarrhea during the campaign,
• 25:37
  suggested a direct frontal constitutional attack on the
• 25:41
  Impoundment Control Act.
• 25:42
  SPEAKER_00: As I understand it,
• 25:44
  the OMB memo reports that what they are ordering is consistent
• 25:50
  with the Impoundment
• 25:51
  SPEAKER_00: Control Act.
• 25:53
  SPEAKER_00: No, no, no.
• 25:53
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, would you just say it is different from a litigation approach?
• 25:57
  standpoint in terms of what's going to happen because it may be
• 26:01
  the case this is
• 26:02
  why we're going to have to keep doing episodes of the show but
• 26:05
  like it may be the
• 26:06
  case that seven days from now they are saying okay we did our
• 26:10
  pause we did our
• 26:11
  SPEAKER_00: review we're
• 26:14
  SPEAKER_00: 95% of these grants are continuing to flow,
• 26:17
  SPEAKER_00: but we have determined that X,
• 26:20
  SPEAKER_00: Y,
• 26:20
  SPEAKER_00: and Z violates our DEI executive order,
• 26:24
  SPEAKER_00: and we're now having a narrow fight about some specific thing.
• 26:29
  SPEAKER_00: Or it could be that they're digging...
• 26:31
  SPEAKER_00: I mean,
• 26:31
  SPEAKER_00: we just don't know,
• 26:32
  SPEAKER_00: and we're going to have to see what happens,
• 26:33
  SPEAKER_00: whereas the inspectors general...
• 26:35
  SPEAKER_00: I mean,
• 26:36
  SPEAKER_00: we don't know exactly what's going to happen,
• 26:38
  SPEAKER_00: but they...
• 26:42
  SPEAKER_00: They could have given 30 days notice.
• 26:45
  SPEAKER_00: You know what I mean?
• 26:45
  Like if they wanted to,
• 26:47
  like,
• 26:47
  I don't,
• 26:47
  I don't understand what difference the 30 days make.
• 26:50
  Like they were trying to violate the terms of that law in order
• 26:56
  to say that those
• 26:58
  SPEAKER_00: conditions are unconstitutional,
• 27:00
  SPEAKER_00: right?
• 27:01
  SPEAKER_00: That this is a,
• 27:02
  SPEAKER_00: I mean,
• 27:02
  there's a longstanding conservative jurisprudence about the
• 27:06
  idea that Congress
• 27:08
  SPEAKER_00: can't place limitations on
• 27:11
  presidential appointments and um you know trump fought that out
• 27:16
  with regard to
• 27:17
  consumer financial protection bureau with regard to the fbi um
• 27:21
  and we will see if
• 27:22
  he picks that fight with regard to the federal reserve down the
• 27:25
  road um but but
• 27:26
  like with inspectors general like they're trying to um raise
• 27:31
  the constitutional
• 27:31
  question whereas with impoundment they seem to be trying to
• 27:34
  duck it i don't know i
• 27:36
  SPEAKER_00: uh the for now
• 27:42
  SPEAKER_01: The view of Steve Vladek and Sam Bagenstas,
• 27:45
  SPEAKER_01: who are experts in this field,
• 27:47
  is that this is a constitutional challenge to the Impoundment
• 27:52
  Control Act,
• 27:53
  SPEAKER_01: whether it's moot before it reaches the Supreme Court or not,
• 27:58
  but that they expect it to be before the Supreme Court if it
• 28:00
  takes effect,
• 28:01
  SPEAKER_01: because there will be somebody withstanding immediately.
• 28:05
  SPEAKER_01: That person will go seek an injunction.
• 28:07
  SPEAKER_01: They'll get it.
• 28:08
  SPEAKER_01: And then...
• 28:10
  SPEAKER_01: the Trump administration is going to have to defend,
• 28:14
  SPEAKER_01: you know,
• 28:14
  even if they say we didn't intend for this to violate the
• 28:17
  impoundment control act,
• 28:18
  SPEAKER_01: there's still a constitutional case that it's like,
• 28:21
  SPEAKER_01: I mean,
• 28:22
  SPEAKER_01: they are,
• 28:23
  SPEAKER_01: they are saying that starting at 5 PM,
• 28:25
  they are going to not spend money that Congress has instructed
• 28:27
  them to spend.
• 28:28
  SPEAKER_01: And that that irrespective of an impoundment control act is,
• 28:32
  SPEAKER_01: it violates the constitution.
• 28:34
  SPEAKER_01: So yes,
• 28:36
  SPEAKER_01: we will do more episodes and we're like,
• 28:38
  SPEAKER_01: if this blows up into the kind of crisis it's percolating into,
• 28:42
  SPEAKER_01: it's going to be a big story.
• 28:44
  SPEAKER_01: But I,
• 28:45
  SPEAKER_01: yes,
• 28:46
  SPEAKER_01: like I,
• 28:48
  SPEAKER_01: I,
• 28:48
  SPEAKER_01: I do think that wherever the story is,
• 28:55
  SPEAKER_01: it,
• 28:56
  SPEAKER_01: it,
• 28:56
  SPEAKER_01: it makes it like very,
• 28:58
  SPEAKER_01: very,
• 28:58
  SPEAKER_01: like,
• 29:00
  SPEAKER_01: more incumbent upon Democrats to say our votes have to be contingent on,
• 29:06
  SPEAKER_01: on real enforceable me like metrics for,
• 29:11
  SPEAKER_01: for,
• 29:11
  SPEAKER_01: for getting this administration right with the law,
• 29:13
  SPEAKER_01: because otherwise,
• 29:15
  SPEAKER_01: you know,
• 29:15
  SPEAKER_01: we're,
• 29:16
  SPEAKER_01: we're,
• 29:17
  SPEAKER_01: we're playing sucker to,
• 29:20
  SPEAKER_01: to what is ultimately just like a like,
• 29:24
  SPEAKER_01: like lawless law.
• 29:26
  SPEAKER_01: regime, you know?
• 29:27
  SPEAKER_00: Yeah.
• 29:28
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, I just, I don't know how to put it.
• 29:30
  SPEAKER_00: I feel like people are always accusing Democrats of being suckers.
• 29:35
  SPEAKER_00: But specifically,
• 29:38
  like the thing that they think they're trying to do is get
• 29:41
  appropriations for
• 29:42
  SPEAKER_00: programs that they like.
• 29:44
  SPEAKER_00: So I just like,
• 29:45
  I feel like there's almost been a failure of imagination on the
• 29:50
  part of Republicans
• 29:51
  SPEAKER_00: here in terms of understanding like what's what and what the next
• 29:56
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, I don't know.
• 29:58
  SPEAKER_00: I don't know.
• 29:58
  SPEAKER_00: I don't know what what Mike Johnson is.
• 30:01
  Donald Trump seems like he is not that interested in the
• 30:04
  legislative process.
• 30:05
  I'm not even sure he realizes that I assume this all came from
• 30:09
  Russell vote vote.
• 30:10
  SPEAKER_00: Yeah,
• 30:10
  SPEAKER_00: but I mean,
• 30:11
  he might Trump might not even realize that like he's on the
• 30:13
  brink of a real mess.
• 30:15
  SPEAKER_00: There was an interesting,
• 30:16
  SPEAKER_00: I felt like a very interesting story from Jake Sherman at Punchbowl,
• 30:21
  SPEAKER_00: like a small thing,
• 30:21
  SPEAKER_00: not that interesting in the scheme of big Trump stuff.
• 30:25
  But it said that Republican leaders had gone to Mar-a-Lago and
• 30:30
  told Trump not to
• 30:32
  SPEAKER_00: cancel Joe Biden's EPA tailpipe emission standards.
• 30:38
  That they wanted to put cancellation of the tailpipe emission
• 30:41
  standards into a
• 30:43
  SPEAKER_00: reconciliation bill.
• 30:44
  Because canceling the emission standards will lead to lower
• 30:48
  sales of electric cars.
• 30:50
  Lower sales of electric cars will lead to lower expenditures on
• 30:54
  EV tax credits.
• 30:56
  So you can use that provision in a reconciliation bill to
• 31:01
  partially offset the cost
• 31:03
  SPEAKER_00: of the tax cut that they want to do.
• 31:04
  SPEAKER_00: And so like they came to Mar-a-Lago, they explained all this to Trump.
• 31:08
  SPEAKER_00: They were like, we will definitely do it.
• 31:10
  If by some miracle it like doesn't get into the bill,
• 31:13
  like you can just do it later.
• 31:15
  SPEAKER_00: But like, don't do this in your day one executive orders.
• 31:19
  SPEAKER_00: And he just did.
• 31:21
  SPEAKER_00: You know,
• 31:21
  SPEAKER_00: even though,
• 31:22
  SPEAKER_00: like,
• 31:23
  SPEAKER_00: there's no question of constitutionality,
• 31:25
  SPEAKER_00: law,
• 31:26
  SPEAKER_00: norms,
• 31:26
  SPEAKER_00: anything like that.
• 31:27
  They were just like,
• 31:28
  you have to,
• 31:28
  like,
• 31:29
  help us pass a reconciliation bill.
• 31:32
  And he had said a lot of times on the campaign trail that he
• 31:36
  was going to do this
• 31:37
  SPEAKER_00: by executive order on his first day.
• 31:39
  SPEAKER_00: And so, you know, by golly, he did.
• 31:42
  SPEAKER_00: And I mean, I think Trump, like...
• 31:46
  It's the flip side of being an aspirant dictator is that he
• 31:51
  wants to run roughshod
• 31:53
  SPEAKER_00: over the congressional opposition,
• 31:56
  SPEAKER_00: but he doesn't care about...
• 31:59
  SPEAKER_00: his coalition in Congress.
• 32:02
  SPEAKER_00: Like he's not, he's not like working.
• 32:04
  Well,
• 32:05
  no,
• 32:05
  I mean,
• 32:05
  I actually think it's,
• 32:06
  you know,
• 32:07
  there's a couple of ways to read that,
• 32:08
  right?
• 32:08
  Did Trump just decide I want the glory of this one extra
• 32:12
  executive order,
• 32:13
  blah,
• 32:13
  blah,
• 32:13
  blah.
• 32:14
  SPEAKER_01: But like,
• 32:15
  SPEAKER_01: I think that if you want to look at what,
• 32:18
  he thinks that there's nothing he can do that will inspire any
• 32:23
  meaningful influence.
• 32:24
  SPEAKER_01: opposition from his own coalition.
• 32:27
  SPEAKER_01: They are under his thumb entirely.
• 32:29
  And the reason I think that is because he fired the inspectors
• 32:34
  general and he
• 32:35
  issued this impoundment order while Russell Vogt's nomination
• 32:42
  is still pending.
• 32:43
  SPEAKER_01: He hasn't been confirmed.
• 32:45
  SPEAKER_01: A bunch of people Trump wants in the government haven't been confirmed.
• 32:50
  SPEAKER_01: These are the kinds of steps that would normally,
• 32:53
  SPEAKER_01: if there was any independence of his party from him,
• 32:57
  result in John Thune or Chuck Grassley or whoever going to him
• 33:01
  and saying,
• 33:03
  we are not going to confirm any of these people until you
• 33:08
  reinstate the IGs or
• 33:10
  SPEAKER_01: nominate credible replacements or...
• 33:13
  SPEAKER_01: rescind this impoundment order.
• 33:14
  And he's like,
• 33:16
  yes,
• 33:18
  whoever,
• 33:18
  whoever is ultimately responsible for,
• 33:20
  for,
• 33:20
  for doing these things.
• 33:21
  And I think at least with the IGs,
• 33:23
  it's him and,
• 33:24
  and,
• 33:24
  and probably the impoundment thing too.
• 33:26
  SPEAKER_01: Like they must know that like,
• 33:30
  this is antagonizing Republicans in the Senate about as much as
• 33:34
  is possible because
• 33:36
  SPEAKER_01: And they just did it anyway,
• 33:37
  SPEAKER_01: and they think that they're going to get all their nominees through.
• 33:39
  SPEAKER_00: Yes, yes.
• 33:40
  SPEAKER_00: I mean,
• 33:40
  SPEAKER_00: that is what – I mean,
• 33:41
  SPEAKER_00: the big difference between now and 2017 is that in 2017,
• 33:46
  Trump had a very uncertain actual relationship with Republican
• 33:53
  Party senators.
• 33:55
  SPEAKER_00: It was –
• 33:57
  In the end,
• 33:58
  he won them over to his side,
• 34:01
  but that wasn't the case in January,
• 34:03
  February 2017.
• 34:05
  SPEAKER_00: It was very surprising.
• 34:07
  SPEAKER_00: They had spent,
• 34:08
  many of them had spent much of the campaign trail distancing
• 34:10
  themselves from him.
• 34:12
  Whereas now,
• 34:14
  in a secret ballot,
• 34:19
  Trump tried to get Rick Scott in as majority leader.
• 34:23
  and didn't they went with dune and everybody said at the time
• 34:27
  that it was like
• 34:27
  really important that that was a secret ballot in which
• 34:31
  everyone felt comfortable
• 34:33
  um defying trump and going with their with their private sense
• 34:36
  of this uh but most
• 34:38
  of congress is not a secret ballot and most republican party
• 34:42
  senators do not want
• 34:43
  SPEAKER_00: to fight with trump about things you know like yeah they um
• 34:50
  You can categorize exactly on what the nature of that not
• 34:55
  wanting to fight with
• 34:56
  SPEAKER_00: Trump is,
• 34:57
  SPEAKER_00: but they don't want to pick fights with Trump.
• 35:01
  SPEAKER_00: They don't want to assert that.
• 35:03
  SPEAKER_00: And very, very, very few of them are...
• 35:06
  SPEAKER_00: electorally vulnerable,
• 35:07
  SPEAKER_00: you know,
• 35:08
  SPEAKER_00: in a way that makes them like motivated to,
• 35:10
  SPEAKER_00: to demonstrate independence from,
• 35:12
  SPEAKER_00: from Trump.
• 35:14
  SPEAKER_00: Should we break?
• 35:15
  SPEAKER_00: Should we talk about?
• 35:15
  SPEAKER_00: Yeah.
• 35:16
  SPEAKER_00: Yeah.
• 35:16
  SPEAKER_00: Because that's.
• 35:18
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 35:18
  SPEAKER_01: Because I mean, to Hegseth, Democrats united in opposition against him.
• 35:22
  SPEAKER_01: That's more or less all they could do.
• 35:25
  And I suspect they're going to be united against all this other
• 35:28
  stuff as well.
• 35:29
  It's just a question of like how much additional leverage they
• 35:32
  bring to bear about it.
• 35:33
  One question I have before we go to the other side is maybe
• 35:37
  what's happening is this.
• 35:39
  Maybe Democrats were trying to have a normal appropriations
• 35:43
  negotiation with
• 35:44
  SPEAKER_01: Republicans so that they could get more money spent,
• 35:47
  SPEAKER_01: so that it had inflationary pressure on prices,
• 35:51
  SPEAKER_01: so that eggs got more expensive,
• 35:53
  SPEAKER_01: so that they could really stick it to Donald Trump on the eggs question.
• 35:56
  SPEAKER_01: And the impoundment order is Trump's answer.
• 36:00
  SPEAKER_01: His way of saying,
• 36:01
  SPEAKER_01: no,
• 36:01
  SPEAKER_01: no,
• 36:01
  SPEAKER_01: no,
• 36:02
  SPEAKER_01: I'm just going to depress the economy by not spending this money,
• 36:05
  SPEAKER_01: bringing the price of eggs back down,
• 36:07
  SPEAKER_01: checkmate libs.
• 36:09
  SPEAKER_00: Eggs is bird flu, man.
• 36:11
  SPEAKER_01: Eggs is bird flu.
• 36:12
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah, watch out.
• 36:13
  SPEAKER_01: All right.
• 36:14
  SPEAKER_01: We're going to talk about serious things on the other side,
• 36:16
  SPEAKER_01: including who benefits from all this.
• 36:19
  If you want to hear that,
• 36:21
  go to politics.fm and upgrade your subscription.